City Council

CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 CITY HALL 22710 E. COUNTRY VISTA DRIVE 7:00 P.M. 1. INVOCATION 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. CALL TO ORDER 4. ROLL CALL 5. AGENDA APPROVAL 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. WORKSHOP DISCUSSIONS  Mixed Use in the Industrial Zone - Lanzce Douglass  Moratorium / Quasi Judicial Process – Gregg Dohrn  City Council’s 2017 Priorities – Town Square Phase II 8. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS  Finance Committee 9. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT 10. ACTION ITEM Consent Agenda i. Approve September 13, 2016 City Council Minutes ii. Approve September 20, 2016 vouchers in the amount of $200,129.45 11. RESOLUTION Resolution No. 16-214, supporting the establishment of the Spokane County Human Rights Task Force 12. INTRODUCTION OF UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION – Updates on labor negotiations / current litigation 14. CITIZEN COMMENTS 15. ADJOURNMENT The public is invited to attend. Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City at 755-6700 with 24-hours advance notice for special accommodations. WORKSHOP DISCUSSION MATERIAL  MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Peterson and City Council From: Katy Allen Subject: Population Data, Single and Multi-Family Ratio Date: August 26, 2016 LIBERTY LAKE BY THE NUMBERS This memo is a follow up from your retreat on August 16th and provides a response to four questions: 1. What is the current and projected future population of Liberty Lake? 2. What is the current ratio of Single Family to Multi-Family Housing units? 3. What is the future ratio of Single Family to Multi-Family Housing units? 4. How does Liberty Lake compare to other communities? Sources of information came from the State and County census and occupancy data, River District and Stone Hill SAP’s (Specific Area Plans), and the Land Quantity Analysis completed by EWU in 2015. Most importantly I want to thank Gregg Dohrn and Genevieve Keeseaker who provided experience and professional knowledge on how to best understand the meaning of these numbers for planning purposes. Note: Population estimates and ratios at “build-out” are based on projection of current trends and land use designations. Question 1: What is the current and projected future population of Liberty Lake? Year Population 2015 8,900 2016 9,375 2017 9,780 (Estimate by Spokane County) 2017 - 2037 15,909 (Forecast and allocation by Spokane Co.) Est. Population at Build-out 25,470 (2015 EWU LQA w/ no annexations) __________________________________________________________________ 22710 E. Country Vista Dr., Liberty Lake, Washington 99019 Phone: 509.755.6700 Fax: 509.755.6713 Comments from Gregg Dohrn that helped me in understanding how to use these numbers: 1. The projected population at any point in time is not as important as the projected population at build-out. As planners we tend to think in terms of 20-year planning horizons, and growth projections are helpful for measuring the rate of change, to monitor how the capacity of public facilities are being affected, to and determine when needed improvements might be required. Population projections are more art than science and are based on a number of assumptions, including economic conditions, the availability of financing, historic growth rates, the average size of households, and the type of housing being constructed. These factors can and do frequently change, so as a result, we are constantly comparing actual growth rates to projections to see if there are changes in trends. 2. The projected population at build-out is an important number for communities to keep in mind, especially in Liberty Lake where geographic limitations effectively preclude expansion beyond the current boundaries. As a result, once the vacant land suitable for development has been built on the future population will be pretty well set. As we discussed, it is not fixed, as residents may choose to stay in the community after their children grow up and leave the house, or families with more children could replace families with less, or if there are areas in the city with older, lower density housing it is possible that it could be replaced with higher density housing. But by in large, once the vacant land is developed, the population of Liberty Lake will not likely to change much. The population at build-out is also based on a number of assumptions including household size and the mix of residential to non-residential development. Typically, the projected population at build-out is based on the current zoning and permitted densities. So the 25,470 number is the projected population of the city at build out based on the current zoning, densities, and household size. For planning purposes it is much more valuable than the projected population at a point in time as it tells us what the maximum demand for services and what the ultimate revenue stream will be for the city. Question 2: What is the current ratio of Single Family to Multi Family Housing units? Single Family 71.5% Multi Family 28.5% Calculations: 2016 Total dwellings = 3,787 2016 Total Multi-Family units = 1,081 (28.5%) 2016 Total Single Family units = 2,706 (71.5%) Source of Information: Country Vista 192 Big Trout Apartment 297 Big Trout Condo 224 1st Liberty (Hawkstone) 75 Broadwing 51 Bitterroot 210 Court Yard 32 Total 1,081 __________________________________________________________________ 22710 E. Country Vista Dr., Liberty Lake, Washington 99019 Phone: 509.755.6700 Fax: 509.755.6713 Question 3: What is the expected future ratio of Single Family to Multi Family Housing units at Build Out? Single Family 65% Multi Family 35% Calculations: Vacant Capacity: SF Units MF Units Total Units Population M2 0 1110 1110 2909 R1 1445 0 1445 3786 R2 294 0 294 770 River District 2053 513 2566 6723 Stone Hill 0 816 816 2138 3792 2439 6231 16,326 Existing 2706 1081 3787 6498 (65%) 3520 (35%) 10,018 More Information that you may find useful: Year to Date: Estimated Permitted/Pending Residential Units Multi Family Single Family River District 87 54 Stone Hill 51 16 Legacy Ridge 10 Rocky Hill 37 Legacy Villas Apt 258 Sub Total 396 117 Other Legacy Ridge West 264 River District 96 Total 396 477 Ratios: 2017+ Total dwellings = 4,660 (3787 + 396+477) 2017+ Total Multi Family = 1,477 (1081 + 396) 31.6% 2017+ Total Single Family = 3,183 (2706 + 477) 68.4% Population of Pending Residential Units = 4660 x 2.62 = 12,209 __________________________________________________________________ 22710 E. Country Vista Dr., Liberty Lake, Washington 99019 Phone: 509.755.6700 Fax: 509.755.6713 Question 4: How does Liberty Lake compare to other communities? (Information Source: 2010 Census) Liberty Lake, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 7,591 70% 30% 62% 33% 5% Cheney, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 10,590 30% 70% 47% 51% 2% Airway Heights, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 6,114 55% 45% 50% 29% 21% Deer Park, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 3,652 67% 33% 67% 17% 16% Millwood, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 1,783 73% 27% 89% 10% 1% Medical Lake, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 5,060 66% 34% 66% 24% 10% Spangle, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 278 66% 34% 57% 6% 37% __________________________________________________________________ 22710 E. Country Vista Dr., Liberty Lake, Washington 99019 Phone: 509.755.6700 Fax: 509.755.6713 Fairfield, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 612 80% 20% 82% 8% 10% Rockford, Washington Total % Owner % Renter Total Single Total Multi- Mobile Home Population Occupied Occupied Family Units Family Units 470 77% 23% 72% 4% 24% __________________________________________________________________ 22710 E. Country Vista Dr., Liberty Lake, Washington 99019 Phone: 509.755.6700 Fax: 509.755.6713  G. R. Dohrn and Associates Memorandum ______________________________________________________________________________ Date: Katy Allen To: August 22, 2016 From: Gregg Dohrn Subject: Multi-Family Housing Moratorium Depending on the outcome of the discussions on the multi-family moratorium, there are several different actions that the City Council may want to consider and/or refer to the Planning Commission for further deliberation. These actions may include, but are not limited to: 1. Modify the Mixed Use Regulations a. The current regulations only require mixed use development (housing and commercial development) in limited circumstances in the M-2 District where most of the vacant land suitable for multi-family development is located. In many instances the regulations state that the developments should be mixed use which is not mandatory. Changing the mixed use provision to shall would make it mandatory. This change could affect the appearance and layout of multi-family developments and could limit the number of locations where multi-family development would occur, as not all sites would be appropriate for the commercial component of a mixed use development. b. Currently the regulations allow for mixed use developments to be either vertical (commercial on the ground floor and residential above) or horizontal (typically commercial in buildings fronting the street and residential in buildings behind or off the street). If more commercial development was desired the ratio of commercial development to residential development could be increased. This change could also affect the appearance and layout of multi-family developments and could limit the number of locations where multi-family development would occur, as not all sites would be appropriate for the commercial component of a mixed use development. 2. Rezone selected properties in the M-2 District. In most instances, property owners do not welcome changes in zoning that reduces or restricts their development options or the potential return on their investment. Also known as downzoning, rezones of this nature can be very controversial, but there may be limited situations where it may be appropriate, particularly if it is combined with offsetting beneficial changes. There may be some parcels that are currently zoned M-2 Mixed Use, that are far enough away from major arterials or that because of topography are really not well suited for mixed use development. It may be appropriate in consultation with the affected property owner(s) to rezone these parcels to R-1 Single Community Planning Economic Development Facilitation Services  G. R. Dohrn and Associates Family Residential which could potentially change the ratio of single family to multi- family housing over time. 3. Prohibit all multi-family housing in the M-2 District. This would be similar in effect to a downzone, and would likely be strongly opposed by the owners of the vacant property in the M-2 District. It may be helpful to note that in general terms, regulations or changes in regulations cannot be arbitrary or capricious, and must address a legitimate public purpose and cannot be unduly restrictive. 4. Permit the construction of single family residences in the M-2 Zoning District. As an alternative to downzoning parcels, similar results could potentially be accomplished by adding the construction of single family residences in the M-2 District. The market would then determine the demand for multi-family and single family housing and where it should occur. 5. Increase the development potential in the M-2 District for non-residential developments. The goal of the M-2 District is to promote a mixture of uses, to encourage walking as an alternative to driving, and to provide more employment and housing options. Currently this includes standalone multi-family developments, mixed use multi-family developments, and a variety of commercial uses including big box retail. As an alternative to restricting the development potential in this zoning district another approach would be to expand the range of non-residential uses or to provide incentives for the construction of non-residential development. We’d have to research this option further and consult with the development community to identify meaningful incentives, but one example would be to permit the construction of a hospital in the M-2 District, which if that were to happen would bring the potential demand for new professional offices, medical services, coffee shops and restaurants. In addition to increasing the mix of uses in the M-2 District or providing incentives for certain types of development, it is possible that the construction of the Henry Road improvements could make the vacant land in the western portion of the M-2 District more attractive as a potential site for a health care or corporate business campus. Increasing the efforts to accelerate the construction of the Henry Road improvements could make the vacant land in the M-2 District more attractive for non-residential development and/or reduce the potential traffic impacts associated with any development activity in this area. 6. Modify the density of multi-family developments in the M-2 District. The current regulations distinguish between multi-family developments greater and less than 50 units and densities greater and less than 30 dwelling units per acre. Arguably this provides a degree of complexity to the regulations that has limited benefit. As a result, the code could be simplified by eliminating these distinctions and providing a single set Community Planning Economic Development Facilitation Services  G. R. Dohrn and Associates of densities and design standards for each zoning district where multi-family housing is permitted. 7. Modify the multi-family design standards. The City cannot regulate the ownership of housing, such as only permitting owner occupied condominiums, although home owner associations can impose some restrictions as long as they do not illegally discriminate. The City can however establish standards to regulate the design, appearance, and function of multi-family housing. Depending on the location, it may be desirable to require certain types of multi-family housing such as town homes or clusters of cottages, or buildings that are accessed from enclosed entrances. 8. Encourage multi-family housing in certain areas. This option will require some more thought to develop, but if the concern is about the potential amount of multi-family development in the M-2 District, it is possible that encouraging multi-family development in other areas may meet the market demand and serve to reduce the demand for additional multi-family in the M-2 Zone. For instance, a developer has proposed building a mixed use multi-family development on Appleway near the proposed town center. Currently the code does not permit multi-family housing at this site except for an RV park which has already been approved. This proposal would require City Council approval and will be discussed in more detail in the near future. 9. The No Action Alternative. It is possible that given the amount of housing approved and in the development pipeline, that the market for housing will slow down and/or the demand for certain types of housing may be satisfied and the ratio of multi-family to single family housing in the community remains relatively constant. There is one other factor to consider, and this will definitely require more research, and even then it may be difficult if not impossible to determine. But if the future population of the City is a concern, it is possible that options that involve increasing the number of single family residences that could be constructed could potentially increase the population if the size of households tends to be higher in single family residences than in multi-family residences. Community Planning Economic Development Facilitation Services Memorandum To: City Council From: RJ Stevenson Date: 9/15/2016 Re: 2017 Council Priorities - UPDATE On September 13th, City Council met to discuss the 2017 Council Priorities. We had discussion on all the categories except for Town Square. Town Square will be discussed at another meeting. Those categories are: - Town Square (Still to be discussed) - Business Support - Transportation (Comment – make sure pedestrian safety extends to Trails) - Trails / Open Space / Parks & Rec - Miscellaneous From the meeting, there were a few minor adjustments that we made. Attached is the latest draft. Some of the items that were submitted we thought we more task oriented than a priority, so we also have a Task Section. RJ Stevenson Finance Director City of Liberty Lake  EXHIBIT A City of Liberty Lake City Council Meeting September 20, 2016 Council’s Priorities for 2017 1. TOWN SQUARE PROJECT – PHASE II  Repackage bond  Sell Appleway frontage o Finish site  Establish pool construction fund  Establish building construction fund 2. BUSINESS SUPPORT & RECRUITMENT  Local business outreach o City Council / staff  Identify / reevaluate funding for business recruitment 3. TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS  STA internal circulation (Stonehill)  Transportation Plan o Country Vista Drive improvement o Henry Road Interchange o Harvard Road bridge expansion o Country Vista Drive exit  Appleway P.M. peak  Eastbound exit A.M. peak  Pedestrian safety / Crosswalks  Liberty Lake shuttle service 4. PARKS, RECREATION, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE  Trailhead Master Plan  River access o Centennial Trail  Liberty Lake Upland Trail o Design and funding  Barefoot in the Park – expand event o Marketing o Event coordination  Orchard Park 5. MISCELLANEOUS INITIATIVES  Underground utilities  Public art funding  Adopt Code of Ethics for Elected Officials  Evaluate land use options in the M2 zone  Bridging North and South Liberty Lake o Pedestrian Connectivity from Harvard Road  Citizen involvement in city decisions  2017 PRIORITY TASK LIST  Budget cameras for trails  Liberty Lake Road improvement  Add full-time police officer and two reserve officers  Welcome kit for local business outreach  LED street light conversion  Increase the budget for Barefoot in the Park event  Striping Country Vista Drive  Continue the conversation that was started at the Retreat relating to our city growth, projected growth, current population (including all citizens regardless of age) and the current building permits that have been issued to any and all developers  Make City Council meetings viewable for those unable to attend in person  Strive to keep positive relationships with our neighboring cities  Upgrade or provide new laptops or iPads/tablets for council members that are interested  Staff review of safety at school bus stops throughout the City  City Council Subcommittee Agendas  Finance Committee Meeting Agenda – City Hall Conference Room September 20, 2016 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM I. 2017 Budget a. Forecast and Projections b. New Funds c. Latest on Revenue and Expenditures II. 2014-2015 Audit a. Update III. Golf Course Revenue Update IV. Voucher Review ACTION ITEMS  City of Liberty Lake Consent Agenda for September 20, 2016 City Council Meeting Report from the Mayor for pending claims and payment of previously‐approved obligations through September 20, 2016 Payee Description Amount See attached voucher report. Total vouchers through September 20, 2016 $ 200,129.45 TOTAL $200,129.45 RECOMMENDATION: Approve and Authorize for Payment ATTACHMENTS: All original invoices are on file with the City Treasurer. SIGNATURES: City Clerk Mayor Finance Committee RESOLUTION  RESOLUTION NO. 16-214 CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE, WASHINGTON SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SPOKANE COUNTY HUMAN RIGHTS TASK FORCE WHEREAS, the Spokane County Human Right Task Force (SCHRTF), a non-profit, non-partisan organization, is founded upon the principles of human rights as stated in the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the Constitution of Washington State; WHEREAS, the SCHRTF supports the principles of the dignity and worth of each human being; WHEREAS, the SCHRTF supports the self-evident truth that all persons are created equal; WHEREAS, the SCHRTF believes that the dignity of each human being is inviolable; WHEREAS, the SCHRTF opposes discrimination and advocates the application of the “Equal Protection of the Laws” and the “Due Process” clauses of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution in combating discrimination; WHEREAS, the SCHRTF will work for the elimination of prejudice and discrimination and to expand the circle of human concern under the creed “saying yes to human rights is the best way to say no to prejudice”; WHEREAS, the SCHRTF supports civil rights laws that promote racial, social and cultural diversity of the people of the United States and the Inland Northwest in particular, and; WHEREAS, the SCHRTF will work collaboratively and in solidarity with other organizations promoting the principles within this resolution; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Liberty Lake, Washington supports the establishment of the Spokane County Human Rights Task Force and we stand ready to work with the SCHRTF in promoting the principles upon which it was established. Passed by the City Council this 20th day of September, 2016. Steve Peterson, Mayor City of Liberty Lake ATTEST: City Clerk, Ann Swenson APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney, Sean Boutz Introduction of Upcoming Agenda Items  DRAFT CITY COUNCIL ADVANCED AGENDAS For Planning Discussion Purposes Only As of September 14, 2016 Please note: This is a work in progress; items are tentative October 4, 2016 DUE Wed, Sept. 28 1. City Administrator report – to include thank you for donation of arboretum bench 2. Consent Agenda (minutes, vouchers) 3. PRESENTATIONS: o Spokane Transit Authority Public Education o Public Records Update, Sean Boutz, City Attorney o Liberty Lake Municipal Library Board’s Annual Report 4. WORKSHOP DISCUSSIONS: Revenue Sources, RJ Stevenson, Finance Director 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Property Tax & Other Revenue Sources 6. RESOLUTION: River Crossing North 2nd Addition Final Plat Resolution October 18, 2016 DUE Wed, Oct. 12 1. Consent Agenda (minutes, vouchers) 2. WORKSHOP: Mayor Peterson’s Proposed 2017 Budget 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Property Tax & Other Revenue Sources 4. Resolution - Levying the Regular Property Taxes for the City of Liberty Lake November 1, 2016 DUE Wed, Oct. 26 1. Consent Agenda (minutes, vouchers) rd 2. PRESENTATION: Liberty Lake Municipal Library 3 Quarter 2016 Report 3. PUBLIC HEARING: 2017 Budget 4. FIRST READ ORDINANCE: Establishing a Code of Ethics for Elected Officials (goal, nepotism, HE, penalty/enforcement remedies) November 15, 2016 DUE Wed, Nov. 9 1. Consent Agenda (minutes, vouchers) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: 2017 Budget 3. SECOND READ ORDINANCE: Establishing a Code of Ethics for Elected Officials (goal, nepotism, HE, penalty/enforcement remedies) ************* TENTATIVE ITEMS: 1. Ordinance No. 232, granting a non-exclusive Franchise Agreement to Avista Corporation 2. Approve Memorandum of Understanding with Liberty Lake Sewer & Water District / Liberty Lake Road rehabilitation contract 3. Contract with Ptera 4. CFP / CIP 5. LLML 4th Quarter 2016 report (Pamela 1/21/17) 6. Update on traffic study – Tony Woody, CH2M Hill (Nov 15/Dec 6) 7. Design Regulation (Nov/Dec) 8. Action on moratorium on the Acceptance of Applications or Issuance of Permits for the Construction of Multifamily Housing (Ord. 231 expires 12/21) Potential FIRST READ Ordinance 12/6